If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Welcome to the new PC Perspective forums! Have a look around and tell us what you think in our feedback forum. If you notice any bugs or style issues, please report them in this thread.

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.
- Thomas Jefferson

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by 7th Angel

What kind of logic is that? In 1976, Ronald Reagan lost to Gerald Ford, who lost to jimmy carter. In 1980, the guy, who lost to the guy, who lost to carter, was elected in a landslide, defeating an inept incumbent. Romney is NO Ronald Reagan, but obama IS the second coming of jimmy carter!
Do I actually think Romney has a chance??? If he's nominated, he WILL beat obama.

The logic is sound is the point is not misconstrued. Romney has no excitement behind him. And Obama is far far worse then Jimmy Carter.

You seem to be choosing the lessor of two evils based on a branch not controlled by the executive branch. Congress oversees the supreme court. Its the lack of oversight by the House our Representative in not impeaching judges that rule unconstitutionally . As well as the senates failures in confirming justices like sotomayor.

Lets imagine a scenario where the self admitted progressive Romney cant get a conservative judge confirmed by the Democratic controlled senate. Who is to say he doesn't compromise and send a "moderate" judge. One who could vote either way on issues.

But in the end voting for Romney requires one to completely ignore the breeches on our civil liberties that will occur as well as the destruction of our economy. A pill i cant swallow. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils anymore.

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Mitt Romney Just Spoke To An EMPTY Stadium In Detroit

Mitt Romney "unveiled" his economic plan — again — to about 1,200 members of the Detroit Economic Club this afternoon.
For a speech about taxes, that's a pretty good turnout. So good, in fact that the campaign had to find a bigger venue.
Their solution? Ford Field Stadium, the 65,000-seat football arena.
According to the Detroit Free Press, the Romney campaign spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out how to make the stadium look full for television cameras:
About 100 news media representatives and 50 or so TV cameras will set up behind the guests, so that it will be clear Romney is speaking to a crowd....They scrapped three earlier plans: one to have Romney stand in the end zone, speaking up to guests seated in the stands; another to have him on the sidelines near midfield, speaking to guests seated in the stadium's middle sections, and an initial plan to hold the event at the Westin Book Cadillac, which quickly became oversold.
Steve Grigorian, chief operating officer for the Economic Club, said the two earlier Ford Field plans were changed because camera angles would have made it appear there was no one in the stadium but Romney.
Their plan worked — kinda. CSPAN coverage actually did not look too bad — the audience, made up mostly of men in suits and ties, filled the screen whenever the cameras panned back.
But this is the 21st century. Reporters at the event immediately began tweeting photos that showed that Romney was, in fact, speaking to an empty stadium.

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by Invictus

The logic is sound is the point is not misconstrued. Romney has no excitement behind him. And Obama is far far worse then Jimmy Carter.

You seem to be choosing the lessor of two evils based on a branch not controlled by the executive branch. Congress oversees the supreme court. Its the lack of oversight by the House our Representative in not impeaching judges that rule unconstitutionally . As well as the senates failures in confirming justices like sotomayor.

Lets imagine a scenario where the self admitted progressive Romney cant get a conservative judge confirmed by the Democratic controlled senate. Who is to say he doesn't compromise and send a "moderate" judge. One who could vote either way on issues.

But in the end voting for Romney requires one to completely ignore the breeches on our civil liberties that will occur as well as the destruction of our economy. A pill i cant swallow. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils anymore.

LOL!!! "Voting for Romney requires one to completely ignore the breeches on our civil liberties that will occur as well as the destruction of our economy. A pill i cant swallow."
You, sir, don't have much choice. You can either gag trying to "swallow" a Romney pill, or gag having to "swallow" round 2 of the obama pill. As an American, you certainly have the right not to vote for "the lesser of two evils", but you WILL have to "swallow" a pill... Might as well do like me, and gag voting for the lesser of two evils.

Also, "Lets imagine a scenario where the self admitted progressive Romney cant get a conservative judge confirmed by the Democratic controlled senate. Who is to say he doesn't compromise and send a "moderate" judge. One who could vote either way on issues."

Assuming that the democrats will maintain control of the Senate is quite presumptuous. Also, with obama, you know for a FACT that the judges he will appoint will be liberal activists. There will be NO doubt which way obama's appointees will vote on issues!

Liberal - A person so "open minded" that their morals, values and intelligence have fallen out and been lost.

Re: The 2012 Election Thread

Originally Posted by 7th Angel

LOL!!! You, sir, don't have much choice. You can either gag trying to "swallow" a Romney pill, or gag having to "swallow" round 2 of the obama pill. As an American, you certainly have the right not to vote for "the lesser of two evils", but you WILL have to "swallow" a pill... Might as well do like me, and gag voting for the lesser of two evils.

Its because of voters who do as you suggest that our country is on a path of self destruction.

Originally Posted by 7th Angel

Assuming that the democrats will maintain control of the Senate is quite presumptuous. Also, with obama, you know for a FACT that the judges he will appoint will be liberal activists. There will be NO doubt which way obama's appointees will vote on issues!

Your seem to be missing the point. Why must one compromise when its not necessary? You can elect a man that will only appoint justices that will strictly follow the constitution while protecting your personal liberties and starting us on the path to having debt free money.

You seem to be worried about only the supreme court and that should be a concern. But not at the risk of losing the buying power of your money or the loss of your personal freedom. We need a president who stands up for the people and not special interests.

Ill never consider a vote anyone makes for something they believe in to be wasted.